Illegal immigrant license bill goes to governor

Measure heading toward governor is the chapter in long history of this issue

SACRAMENTO  California may start issuing driver’s licenses to a limited number of young immigrants here illegally, after broader efforts have hit detours and red lights for nearly two decades.

The Assembly late Thursday sent the bill to the governor, after the Senate passed the measure Wednesday.

“I would never argue it’s popular, but I will argue it’s the right thing to do,” said Assemblyman Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, who has carried several versions of a driver’s license bill.

Republicans have been nearly united in opposition to granting licenses to those here illegally.

“My concern is there is no way we’re going to be able to control who is actually taking advantage of the program,” said Assemblyman Brian Jones, R-Santee.

Unlike his earlier measures, Cedillo’s Assembly Bill 2189 does not clear the way for every illegal immigrant to apply for a license.

Instead, it’s narrowly crafted to include only those who receive federal permission to live and work here as part of President Barack Obama’s recent “Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals” directive.

To be eligible for the two-year stay of deportation, applicants must be between the ages of 15 and 31, were brought to the U.S. before the age of 16, are enrolled in a school or graduated or honorably discharged from the military, do not have a criminal record and have lived in the U.S for five continuous years.

There are an estimated 450,000 people living in California who meet the federal requirements, while state officials say overall there are about 2 million illegal immigrants here.

Brown’s own Department of Motor Vehicles two weeks ago confirmed that legally it probably will have to test and license applicants holding any temporary residency documents issued by the federal government.

Nevertheless, he has not taken a position on the measure.

As attorney general, Brown had opposed granting driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants and he repeated that stand in a 2010 gubernatorial debate against Republican Meg Whitman.

But Brown last year signed a bill that bans police from impounding a vehicle stopped at a sobriety checkpoint if the driver’s only offense was not having a license. The bill came after widespread reports of roadblocks being set up disproportionately in communities with high numbers of Hispanic drivers.

Driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants ranks along with abortion, gun rights and taxes as one of the most politically divisive issues in recent California history.

Over the past two decades, state measures have stalled, been vetoed, signed into law and then repealed. The 2003 recall of Gov. Gray Davis was driven, in part, by his signature on a bill granting licenses. A bill repealing that policy was signed by Arnold Schwarzenegger soon after taking office.

California is not alone in wrestling with the issue. Many states have enacted restrictions.

Nationally, limits on driver’s licenses — the primary proof of identification to board airplanes, entire federal buildings and open bank accounts — were incorporated as part of the “Real ID Act” adopted by Congress in the wake of 9/11.

The lawmaker at the center of the debate — then, as he is now — is Cedillo, who was once dubbed “one bill Gil” because of his relentless campaign to change the licensing law.

Cedillo has introduced a number of measures, ranging from granting a basic license to one that would be stamped “for driving only.”

Cedillo has insisted that freeing illegal immigrants to qualify will make the state’s highways safer because those who are already driving will be encouraged to be tested, licensed and obtain insurance.

“That’s always been our argument,” he said.

Critics of the bill argue that a license is a privilege that should not be a reward for breaking the law. They also warn that terrorists and violent gang members would have a channel into society with a driver’s license as identification.

Cedillo said Obama has taken off the table GOP arguments that it is rewarding lawbreakers because those eligible will have been granted a temporary right to residency.

He said a law remains necessary to ensure that DMV accepts whatever federal documents are issued.

“The department has very strict rules,” he said. “If it’s not their form they’re not going to give you a license.”

But Assemblyman Jones said Obama does not have the authority to unilaterally change immigration law so California should not be endorsing the action by approving the bill.

“He is usurping federal law passing this without Congressional approval. That is wrong. For California to hitch our wagon to that engine is wrong. It’s bad law. It’s bad policy,” Jones said.

Sen. Juan Vargas, D-San Diego, was one of the few to oppose the repeal when he was in the Assembly and remains convinced nine years later.

“People are driving anyway, whether documented or undocumented. This at least would require them to have a license, insurance. It will make the roads safer,” Vargas said Thursday.

Politics aside, the legislation is also rooted in a critical 1995 precedent set by the state Court of Appeal. In Lauderbach V. Zolin, the court held that if someone is authorized by the federal government to be in the U.S. then they are eligible for a driver’s license — even if they otherwise do not qualify for a Social Security card.